Pink magic

Bro, I feel ya. It feels like that dark place I was in is so distant now, that it's in another life or something. I am doing so well right now and I must say tha phosphatydilserine at 1,000mg per day (Serinaid yielding 20% Pserine at 10 grams) is a freaking life changer. I'm getting PA's d-spray and pr-spray and I anticipate the combo being really, really nice.

D spray, pr spray and R spray together is king..but why are we arguing here? Come on lets be a little more positive here

i believe you wrongly attacked PA , "not having stomach" doesn't mean he can't handle it , he choose another direction in which he wanted new areas not the same old ones just rebuilt.

I can write outrageous ad copy just like any other regular company. In fact, I have from time to time written such stuff as an anonymous consultant for other companies. I actually get a kick out of it and I do a pretty good job.

I could never write such stuff for my own products though because I take them seriously and I take my reputation seriously.

I can write outrageous ad copy just like any other regular company. In fact, I have from time to time written such stuff as an anonymous consultant for other companies. I actually get a kick out of it and I do a pretty good job.

I could never write such stuff for my own products though because I take them seriously and I take my reputation seriously.

But would you not expect one who has high ethics to be even more careful in what they do "when no one is looking" or anonymously

Originally Posted by Patrick Arnold

The right way?The ends justify the means right? This is why I dont have the stomach. Because I have ethics, and I take science seriouslyGo make a million bucks if thats what is most important to you

This ingredient really excites me. So much so that I spent money I didn’t have to be the first one to the market with a fully dosed product. The literature on this is so impressive. By impressive I mean the literature is published in fully accredited journals by authors with no conflict of interest. And the research is expansive - looking at mechanisms at the cellular and genetic level in depth.

The first and foremost study regarding Ursolic Acid is one that has garnered a lot of press lately. It was published in the very prestigious journal Cellular Metabolism, and the research was performed by scientists from the University of Iowa. They used techniques to identify genes that were turned on and off by two muscle catabolic stressors – starvation and denervation (think of spinal cord injury). They then turned to a huge database of gene (mRNA actually) expression signatures from 1300 candidate chemicals and after screening for which turned the right genes on (the anabolic ones) and turned the right genes off (the catabolic ones) they came to one that stood out – Ursolic acid. The researchers then gave Ursolic acid to starved mice and to denervated mice and they found that it indeed powerfully act as an anti-catabolic. They lost much less muscle than control mice.

The cool part is they went on to see if it acted as an anabolic. That is, they wanted to see what it did to normal mice on a normal diet. They feed Ursolic acid to a group of mice for 5 weeks and then found that their muscles grew around 15% bigger than a control group of mice over the same period. The muscle fibers themselves appear markedly bigger under the microscope, so this was hypertrophy going on. The muscle was fully functional as well, which was demonstrated by measuring grip strength. The Ursolic mice had a significantly stronger grip (I guess the made the mice hang on a tiny chin up bar till they dropped or something).

Now you probably think that since the mice grew bigger muscles they probably weighed more than the control mice. Such was not the case. That is because there was almost a proportional decrease in fat mass in respect to the increase in muscle mass. Essentially, the body was using the fat to fuel the energy needed to build the muscle!! That is what is known as a recomposition effect and it is seen with agents such as clenbuterol. It is not really seen with anabolic steroids though, since although “roids” are great for building muscle, they don’t really affect fat mass in such an obvious and direct manner.

The researchers finally looked at how Ursolic acid worked (I told you, this paper is extremely thorough and comprehensive). Examination of which genes got turned on and which got turned off (via examining mRNA expression signals) showed strong signals for 18 being turned on and 51 being turned off. Two of the most potent ones to be turned off were ones strongly associated with muscle atrophy - atrogin-1 and MuRF-1. The most potent one to be turned on was the one that encodes IGF-1 in muscle. The local production of IGF-1 is perhaps the single most instrumental process in the muscle hypertrophy response as it initiates the key steps of satellite cell recruitment into new myonuclei and protein synthesis via the kinase Akt.

So that paper was great and it’s what really convinced me this stuff has huge potential to be the real deal (once we figure out how best to use it and what the best dose is – and you guys are gonna help me with that). But there is other research on Ursolic acid that has been published showing some other really cool things. A 2008 study demonstrated that Ursolic acid possesses good aromatase inhibitory activity in-vitro, meaning that it can potentially help reduce estrogen production in the body and increase testosterone. It also has been shown to be anabolic on bone via stimulation of osteoblast formation. Of particular interest to me, a 2010 paper published in Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry showed that Ursolic acid and some of its derivatives are potent and selective inhibitors of the tissue specific cortisol elevating enzyme 11b-HSD1. And finally, if you are a drinker than you might be interested to know that a 2006 paper from Life Sciences showed that Ursolic protects the liver from toxicity due to ethanol consumption. And then there are anti-cancer, anti-oxidant, anti-viral…….the list really goes on and on.

So bottom line is I think this supplement is going to be big. I have a good track record of picking winning ingredients in the supplement industry so you should not dismiss this one. In fact, I have used it for a few weeks and what I have to report is an obvious and dramatic loss in body fat with a maintanence of muscle. I was not even trying to diet, but I found that my appetite was curbed on the stuff. Maybe because I didn’t need to eat since it was making my body feed off my fat. I don’t know. Anyway, I hope to be the first to market with this stuff so please look for my product Ursobolic by E-Pharm. It will have high dosages of nothing but Ursolic Acid extract. I can’t wait to hear other people’s feedback!!

A very tall order considering there is zero in vivo human data supporting those claims. Yes it turns on and off the same genes in mice that are in humans but so do hundreds of other compounds (i.e. CEE, ecdysterone, methoxyflavone, arginine) that have turned out to have no anabolic effects in humans. So considering that we know that non-human research is not worth a whole lot when it comes to establishing efficacy of supplements I would say that the sales pitch above is the type of marketing that you claim unable to stomach.

And for the record, I am not dismissing ursolic acid and its potential as I am a fan of it. I am just pointing out that hyperbole is an almost inevitable part of marketing and your holier than thou stance on this is quite funny.

PESCIENCE.COM

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates

lol.. really? A very tall order considering there is zero in vivo human data supporting those claims. Yes it turns on and off the same genes in mice that are in humans but so do hundreds of other compounds (i.e. CEE, ecdysterone, methoxyflavone, arginine).

Please. You dont know what you are talking about. These substances have never been demonstrated to affect muscle and fat related gene expression like ursolic acid has (and likely not at all). Maybe you should read the research itself but I have a feeling you dont have the background to appreciate itU are a giants fan so u are probably a decent guy. You are just doing your USP job

As far as human in vivo data goes, none of my really succesful ingredients had human in-vivo data supporting my claims before I marketed them. They did have a enough evidence to strongly suggest that they would work in humans though.

If you wait around for human data then you will be the guy that sells stuff like creatine hmb and beta-alanine after everyone else has sold it. creatine did not have human data before it was sold. it was put on market as a theory and a few studies on rats and dogs

To be on the vanguard you have to introduce things when they are novel. Yes other companies introduce novel stuff all the time, but novelty itself is certainly not enough. There has to be a critical mass of suggestive evidence that demonstrates it has a reasonable possibility of being effective (and safe) in humans

i originally had planned to sit back on this but after reading and watching it develop i would like to throw my 2 cents. i truly believe in PA and his ethics and his dedication to his job. instead of focusing on a easy exit out of work and future stress he continues to devote his passion and work to developing and creating and pushing froward. he could make one product and MILK it as much as he wants with little to no effort but instead focused on education and allowing the customer/user to be responsible and use it properly. without sounding like i am munching on PA's ****. i just believe in similar concept of never becoming relaxed and digging into your position of contentment, i seek new challenges and new experiences and i respect science and innovation. after all isn't that why we humans are at the point we are today? if we didn't begin seeking better then the train would not have begun. capitalism is great but its weakness is the greed and false motivation and fire that drives us forward and down i believe you wrongly attacked PA , "not having stomach" doesn't mean he can't handle it , he choose another direction in which he wanted new areas not the same old ones just rebuilt.

he's the one who said he didn't have the stomach not me, i was just repeating it.....as for attacking him, i didn't mean to come off that way, like i had said what he's done on the scientific side of things is solid but

i just didn't understand why he seemed to be upset that usp capitalized on a product....but i never questioned the products or research of his, i love 1,3, i also use daa...i recommend both to people

i also seem to be in the minority that doesn't get upset over the marketing of companies, to me it's just to easy to bypass the fluff in the write ups and find out what the product is supposed to do

he's the one who said he didn't have the stomach not me, i was just repeating it.....as for attacking him, i didn't mean to come off that way, like i had said what he's done on the scientific side of things is solid but

i just didn't understand why he seemed to be upset that usp capitalized on a product....but i never questioned the products or research of his, i love 1,3, i also use daa...i recommend both to people
i also seem to be in the minority that doesn't get upset over the marketing of companies, to me it's just to easy to bypass the fluff in the write ups and find out what the product is supposed to do

that's the biggest problem with marketing, the marketing is the fluff and its the laziness and the lack of knowledge on the topic that fuels these huge machines that suck in massive profits off twisted information.

he's the one who said he didn't have the stomach not me, i was just repeating it.....as for attacking him, i didn't mean to come off that way, like i had said what he's done on the scientific side of things is solid but

i just didn't understand why he seemed to be upset that usp capitalized on a product....but i never questioned the products or research of his, i love 1,3, i also use daa...i recommend both to people

i also seem to be in the minority that doesn't get upset over the marketing of companies, to me it's just to easy to bypass the fluff in the write ups and find out what the product is supposed to do

Not me. For example I realized an new ATD supplement came out made by Titan labs. In their marketing they have a proprietary blend listing the chemical nomenclature of ATD and fukking hesperetin? Hesperetin? Why? Well I think its because the product only contains like . 1 mg ATD and the rest is just a sugar molecule...absolutely ridiculous. Be honest with your customers if you fuk them they will find out. Take a look at elite fitness with the new transdermals. One person got bloods that showed the product is ineffective. Now EVERYONE IS GETTING BLOODS DONE AND QUESTIONING THE PRODUCTS. People are not idiots. We find out when you **** us and you lose. Trust is hard to gain but soooooooo easy to lose

he's the one who said he didn't have the stomach not me, i was just repeating it.....as for attacking him, i didn't mean to come off that way, like i had said what he's done on the scientific side of things is solid but

i just didn't understand why he seemed to be upset that usp capitalized on a product....but i never questioned the products or research of his, i love 1,3, i also use daa...i recommend both to people

i also seem to be in the minority that doesn't get upset over the marketing of companies, to me it's just to easy to bypass the fluff in the write ups and find out what the product is supposed to do

The problem is not finding out what products intend to do, it's intentionally misleading the masses as to the expected results. We all (everyone in the biz) do this to a certain extent, after all you have to get people excited to try your product, but you don't think some companies go too far?

You don't have a problem with Biotest making absolute gobs of money because they have convinced so many people to buy their product because you can read through the BS and find out what it's intended to do? Products that may indeed work, but are so far marked up that the cost-benefit isn't anywhere near what it should be?

You don't have a problem with companies saying things like gain 25 pounds of muscle in 4 weeks with Muscle X-Plode Juice X?

Don't get me wrong, blame a lot of it on stupid consumers and I think everyone who's ever been on this site has purchased many supplements they have regretted so maybe we're all complicit, but you can just handwave that kind of **** away?

Please. You dont know what you are talking about. These substances have never been demonstrated to affect muscle and fat related gene expression like ursolic acid has (and likely not at all). Maybe you should read the research itself but I have a feeling you dont have the background to appreciate itU are a giants fan so u are probably a decent guy. You are just doing your USP job

Not me. For example I realized an new ATD supplement came out made by Titan labs. In their marketing they have a proprietary blend listing the chemical nomenclature of ATD and fukking hesperetin? Hesperetin? Why? Well I think its because the product only contains like . 1 mg ATD and the rest is just a sugar molecule...absolutely ridiculous. Be honest with your customers if you fuk them they will find out. Take a look at elite fitness with the new transdermals. One person got bloods that showed the product is ineffective. Now EVERYONE IS GETTING BLOODS DONE AND QUESTIONING THE PRODUCTS. People are not idiots. We find out when you **** us and you lose. Trust is hard to gain but soooooooo easy to lose

Propietary blends are often a necessary evil unfortuntately. They often have to be used in cases where you need to keep a formula propietary. OTOH, they can be exploited by people looking to mislead people to think that cool ingredients are in there in more than microgram quantities

For instance lets say i was to introduce a new formula for a stim product that replaces 1,3 DMAA. Just being theortetical of course. Do you think I should list the exact amounts of everything in there so that USP or whoever can immediately clone it? No, I would list the blend of ingredients without outlining exact quantity.

This sort of labeling and descrbing products is done in every industry pretty much other than pharmaceutical (which for obvous reasons demands complete disclosure of actives)

I didnt specify what they did (although I can see how it could be read that way). I was just highlighting the fact that in the past we have seen "the next greatest thing" presented to us which relied on solely on in-vitro and/or mouse data and has never really panned out in humans. And yes, I do understand the value in using the murine model as I have defended it before on this board.

Point of all of this is, it is not a companies responsibility to cater to our least denominator. They should not have to account for the "uneducated, lazy, ignorant, moronic, etc" of their demographic. It is the consumers responsibility to research what they are putting into their body. If they want to take something based solely on a sales pitch and a bunch of anecdotal feedback from forums then that is their choice they are making. No one is forcing anyone to take anything. Most companies will provide write ups to go along with their products and within these writeups there are usually citations and references. Everyone has access to Google and Pubmed so there is no excuse for them to not be at the very least attempting to check a companies citations for a product. You wouldn't suggest that companies stop producing prohormones because SOME people aren't aware of PCT and won't include one would you? Or would you say shame on that individual for not first looking up what he was taking? Companies sell to grown adults, not children. In this day and age with all the information available online that are only clicks away, there is NO EXCUSE for someone to not know why they are taking or are companies supposed to be morally obligated to those not smart enough or too lazy to research on their own?

Almost all marketing is misleading to a point. I find it funny people have a problem with a companies marketing tactic (for moral and ethical reason) yet are perfectly fine supporting companies who are literally breaking the law with what they are selling. Ultimately, if people don't want go buy from companies because of their marketing tactic or style than don't. It's a free market and this is the basis of it. Don't like something than don't support something. If enough people feel the same as you and don't support them then eventually it will change. Simple as that. However, the company has every right though to market their product whichever way they want as long as it abides by the current legal regulations. Hyperbole marketing is not new and is being used by hundreds of companies. If you aren't going to take the initiative to research what you are putting into your body and are expecting supplement companies to hold your hand, then maybe it is time for a new hobby because marketing rules the world and its not going anywhere

PESCIENCE.COM

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates

I didnt specify what they did (although I can see how it could be read that way). I was just highlighting the fact that in the past we have seen "the next greatest thing" presented to us which relied on solely on in-vitro and/or mouse data and has never really panned out in humans. And yes, I do understand the value in using the murine model as I have defended it before on this board.

Point of all of this is, it is not a companies responsibility to cater to our least denominator. They should not have to account for the "uneducated, lazy, ignorant, moronic, etc" of their demographic. It is the consumers responsibility to research what they are putting into their body. If they want to take something based solely on a sales pitch and a bunch of anecdotal feedback from forums then that is their choice they are making. No one is forcing anyone to take anything. Most companies will provide write ups to go along with their products and within these writeups there are usually citations and references. Everyone has access to Google and Pubmed so there is no excuse for them to not be at the very least attempting to check a companies citations for a product. You wouldn't suggest that companies stop producing prohormones because SOME people aren't aware of PCT and won't include one would you? Or would you say shame on that individual for not first looking up what he was taking? Companies sell to grown adults, not children. In this day and age with all the information available online that are only clicks away, there is NO EXCUSE for someone to not know why they are taking or are companies supposed to be morally obligated to those not smart enough or too lazy to research on their own?

Almost all marketing is misleading to a point. I find it funny people have a problem with a companies marketing tactic (for moral and ethical reason) yet are perfectly fine supporting companies who are literally breaking the law with what they are selling. Ultimately, if people don't want go buy from companies because of their marketing tactic or style than don't. It's a free market and this is the basis of it. Don't like something than don't support something. If enough people feel the same as you and don't support them then eventually it will change. Simple as that. However, the company has every right though to market their product whichever way they want as long as it abides by the current legal regulations.

BINGO!!!!!

Almost everyone is breaking the law with their advertising in sports supp industry, some outrageously so. And yeah I know that consumers dont have to worry about that and consumers should not be idiots and they should do their homework. But think about this from another perspective

From the standpoint of the industry it is a terrible thing that there are no standards and companies just keep trying to one up one another with lies and exaggeration. Just because there has been a gross lack of enforcement in sports supps in regards to advertising does not mean that the law is being broken and could not be enforced at any time. From a companies perspective its a terribly depressing thing to understand that by abidiing by the law and reasonable standards you pretty much are guaranteeing you will be outsold by everyone. From the preserpective of the industry overall its a tragic thing as well, because all the ridiculousness just sets the industry up like bowling pins to be knocked over by regulation

My brother is in the direct response marketing business. INfomercials and that stuff. IN contrast to the sports supp industry, advertising claims are strictly and aggressively enforced by the FTC and FDA. YOu have no idea how little you can get away with. The laws are extremely strict and whats going on in the sports supp industry is absolutely appalling

[QUOTE=JudoJosh;3903010 I find it funny people have a problem with a companies marketing tactic (for moral and ethical reason) yet are perfectly fine supporting companies who are literally breaking the law with what they are selling. Ue[/QUOTE]

I dont find this funny or strange at all. I have much more respect for someone that sells illegal steroids or GH and represents what they sell honestly than I do for someone that sells supplement crap that doesnt work and deceives consumers to make a quick buck

Point of all of this is, it is not a companies responsibility to cater to our least denominator. They should not have to account for the "uneducated, lazy, ignorant, moronic, etc" of their demographic. It is the consumers responsibility to research what they are putting into their body. If they want to take something based solely on a sales pitch and a bunch of anecdotal feedback from forums then that is their choice they are making. No one is forcing anyone to take anything. Most companies will provide write ups to go along with their products and within these writeups there are usually citations and references. Everyone has access to Google and Pubmed so there is no excuse for them to not be at the very least attempting to check a companies citations for a product. You wouldn't suggest that companies stop producing prohormones because SOME people aren't aware of PCT and won't include one would you? Or would you say shame on that individual for not first looking up what he was taking? Companies sell to grown adults, not children. In this day and age with all the information available online that are only clicks away, there is NO EXCUSE for someone to not know why they are taking or are companies supposed to be morally obligated to those not smart enough or too lazy to research on their own?

I agree, but keep in mind it's this "least common denominator" that companies are aggressively trying to target with ludicrous claims and exaggerations. Make no bones about it man, companies aren't using the language they use and the claims they make for pubmed warriors such as yourself or many of the people on this site. The money isn't in chasing someone who is intelligent as you are. You think Biotest writes articles on new products trying to get YOU to try it? They KNOW they won't fool you, you're a smart guy who's been around the game for too long. You're privy to all the tricks and trade. They aren't looking for me and you.

You don't say 15 pounds of lean muscle in a month to convince anyone except for those who will be duped by those claims. I agree with what you are saying to an extent, but at some point certain claims become a borderline scam and ethically we can't just blame it all on stupid consumers every single time....or at least I can't. A balance should be struck between marketing and flat out taking advantage of the uneducated with snake oil.

I dont find this funny or strange at all. I have much more respect for someone that sells illegal steroids or GH and represents what they sell honestly than I do for someone that sells supplement crap that doesnt work and deceives consumers to make a quick buck

If the government didn't mess with the supply, the demand wouldn't be as absurd for such compounds like anabolics. There are so many stipulations on the so-called 'free market' (which isn't free at all), that it pushes consumers towards the black market and it allows for certain companies to take advantage of the gullible market and the high demand for such compounds, so they use deceptive advertising. "It's almost too good to be legal! Stronger than steroids!" It is what it is, like with what you said about proprietary blends. It just is.

If the government didn't mess with the supply, the demand wouldn't be as absurd for such compounds like anabolics.

lol WHAT?

E-Pharm Nutrition Representative
WARNING: I tend to speak my mind and will verbally assault you if you are a tool. My words do not necessarily represent the official opinion of E-Pharm, but most likely, they do.

I was trying to make a point about the legislation that bans AAS and designer AAS, etc. having an adverse effect of what they say they are trying to accomplish... I figure that if the government stops ban after ban on steroid hormones, then people wouldn't have to buy the alternatives. I'd much rather be using a topical 4-OH testosterone product than products that surfaced after the 3rd or 4th ban, but that's not possible so I have to find something that the government has not yet caught onto and try my luck with that or choose not to use any at all.

I was trying to make a point about the legislation that bans AAS and designer AAS, etc. having an adverse effect of what they say they are trying to accomplish... I figure that if the government stops ban after ban on steroid hormones, then people wouldn't have to buy the alternatives. I'd much rather be using a topical 4-OH testosterone product than products that surfaced after the 3rd or 4th ban, but that's not possible so I have to find something that the government has not yet caught onto and try my luck with that or choose not to use any at all.

but why bother when we now have someone that has figured out how to unlock the potent anabolic capacities of various weeds and shrubs?